840.48 Refugees/4935: Telegram
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Winant) to the Secretary of State
[Received December 31—11:18 p.m.]
9111. Pursuant to my conversation with Eden (this refers to the Embassy’s telegram No. 9033, December 29, noon) we have again reviewed the entire question of the mandate of the Intergovernmental Committee with Emerson and with a representative of the Foreign Office. We also examined the text of Mr. Long’s statement as quoted in the printed hearings before the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
The Foreign Office representative pointed out that Mr. Long in his testimony on page 34 did not read the revised mandate of the Intergovernmental Committee but did read the recommendations of the Bermuda Conference which have never been placed before the Committee. Both Emerson and the Foreign Office representative also referred to the Department’s press release following the Bermuda Conference of May 19 number 19824 in which the following appears: “It was also agreed that no negotiations with Hitler could be undertaken since his entire record has left no doubt that he would only agree to such solutions as would be of direct aid to the Axis war aims”. They [Page 248] also referred to Peake’s statement before the House of Commons quoted in the telegram referred to above which was agreed to by both the British and American authorities as was the Department’s announcement before it was issued. They felt that they could not issue any statement that indicated that the Intergovernmental Committee through its revised mandate had authority to negotiate with Germany or other enemy governments and pointed out that such a step would only result in a public outcry in this country and difficulties with the member Governments of the Committee, particularly Soviet Russia.
It was agreed however that the scope of the activities of the Committee should be clarified and Emerson has handed us the statement quoted below which is addressed to the Department of State and signed by Emerson as Director of the Committee and which may be published as a communication from the Director by the Department of State if the Department so desires or alternatively issued as a communiqué here in London. Emerson prefers the first alternative since so far the matter has received practically no publicity here and informs me that he understands that the Foreign Office would also prefer this if acceptable to the Department. The statement has the approval of Winterton and of the Foreign Office and I consider that it goes to the absolute limit that either the Executive Committee or the Foreign Office is prepared to go in meeting the Department’s views as set forth in its instructions numbers 8071 December 22 and 8124, December 24, 2 p.m. I therefore suggest that it be accepted and published by the Department in the belief that it will serve to clarify the existing situation.
Following is text of statement:
“On 14th October, 1943, the Intergovernmental Committee on Refugees issued a communiqué25 which included the terms of its mandate. It seems desirable to amplify the communiqué by some account of the scope of the powers of the Committee, and the manner in which they are being exercised.
The procedure followed by the Executive Committee has been to invite all the member Governments to confer on it certain powers. Owing to the difficulty of communications, replies have not yet been received from all those Governments, but those so far received have given the necessary agreement. The persons coming within the activities of the Committee include all those who, as a result of events in Europe, have had to leave, or may have to leave, their countries of residence because of the danger to their lives, or liberties, on account of their race, religion or political beliefs. Provided they come within the above definition, it does not matter where they are—in neutral, occupied or any other countries. It is true that some persons do not need assistance because their own governments are willing, and [Page 249] able, to look after them. Nonetheless, the Intergovernmental Committee is at the service of those governments. It is further true that it is not, at the moment, possible to extend assistance to all, or indeed to the majority who come within the mandate. This is because of the stern facts of war.
The Executive Committee has been empowered for the purpose by the member Governments. Although under the mandate, as it stands, it is not empowered to undertake negotiations with other than neutral or Allied states or organizations, it may, and does, within the powers it has, take such steps as may be necessary to preserve, maintain and transport the persons coming within its responsibility. In the exercise of these powers, the services are sought, when necessary, of neutral governments, some of whom are members of the Committee. Some are willing and able, in their individual capacity, to discuss refugee matters in which the Committee is interested with those governments with whom the Intergovernmental Committee itself cannot carry on negotiations. Their assistance, which has already been of value, is much appreciated; it will be continually sought as occasion requires. The assistance of voluntary organizations is available, and is being used. Thus, under its present revised mandate, the Committee has all requisite authority to do whatever can be done, under present circumstances. The sphere of activities of the Committee is conditioned by practical realities, and not by lack of authority. At present the powers are adequate. If conditions change so as to require an enlargement of them, it is open to the Executive Committee to seek the agreement of member Governments.”